Sorry @maximeag. This isn’t something that’s on the roadmap. It’s just too difficult to support the various network speeds of a NAS.
2 Likes
Are you still working on a way to export/archive completed recordings to a NAS?
Yes @Scott_Curtis - download for offline storage/viewing is definitely on the to-do list! We’ve been chatting about how we want to implement this recently. I’m hopeful it will be in one of the next few releases.
It would be really cool if there were some kind of automated way to do it, such as all completed recordings or all recordings over a certain age or keep the most recent three episodes in Tablo and export the rest.
We’ll keep that in mind!
I’d like to see an ‘export by series’ option so you can just hit one button and get the whole season/series at once. However, I am not an engineer so I’m not sure what’s possible.
1 Like
You can take a look at my tool to export until Tablo officially supports it
1 Like
This is a poor excuse. Attachment via iSCSI supported by many NAS devices can, if the network is designed right, more than exceed what can traverse the USB port. Please implement iSCSI as an option, with a throughput test feature exposed to the user and a ‘let the user beware and bear the risk of use’ caveat if needed.
3 Likes
This would be great
Any update? It’s been over a year.
IF Tablo had gigabit or Wireless AC SUPPORT, then NASCAR device might have worked.
If Tablo can save to the cloud (which is nothing more than a remote NAS), why can’t it save to a local NAS?
1 Like
First, the Tablo cloud storage has very little resemblance to a local NAS. Except for the fact they’re both accessed over a network.
To use a local NAS, the Tablo would need to support a LAN file sharing protocol, probably SMB (aka CIFS). To use their own cloud storage, the Tablo can use their own possibly proprietary protocol. I expect it’s more akin to HTTP than SMB, transferring each hts file as it’s closed.
But the harder part is configuring the NAS. You would need the whole network discovery stack, plus UI for selecting the share and providing authentication credentials. Implemented in how many different clients?
And then there’s the support burden. For the cloud storage, they’re dealing with one provider, themselves. For NAS units, there are hundreds out there. And can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner? Four write streams and six read clients at the same time?
And all that work for what percentage of their customers?
can all of them handle the bandwidth required for a maxed out quad tuner?
That’s nonsense. Cloud storage has to go out over the internet, which will always have less bandwidth than a local NAS.
I can understand not wanting to develop apps for various NAS systems, but I’m not asking for that. I’m asking why network speeds and bandwidth are given as excuses for not supporting network storage when cloud storage is network storage.
What are the cloud servers running? Why can’t Tablo owners run something similar on the local network, and point the Tablo there?
As for the support burden, Tablo already relies on owners to develop and maintain basic functions like the ability to export recordings, so it’s hard to imagine how there would be any support burden. Instead, with a little transparency on the cloud storage process, it’s likely someone will develop the solutions for local storage at no cost to Tablo.
The only possible downside seems to be the risk that Tablo might sell fewer cloud subscriptions. But they already make money on the hardware and the guide data subscription, so that’s BS.
1 Like
This is 90% of why we haven’t done this.
We already spend a significant amount of time working with folks on solidifying their antenna setups and home networks.
Troubleshooting NAS speeds is not something we’d like to get into.
1 Like
So I’m confused. Are you asking why Tablo doesn’t support NAS storage? Or why they won’t publish the specs of their cloud servers?
You keep dismissing the support issues of any complicated features to a product. They’re not trivial. Tablo does NOT support any of the programs that extract recordings. In fact, they hide the API used to do that behind an NDA. They have no support burden for any of those.
Even if they were transparent about the cloud storage, how are you going to force the Tablo to use a local server instead of the cloud server? Heck, if you use Wireshark you could probably reverse-engineer the protocol without any help from Tablo.
1 Like
I think this is a very valid question. The only Tablo product that currently supports cloud is the DUAL Lite and it’s only 2 tuner.
1 Like
I call nonsense in turn. Yes, the Internet connection will have less bandwidth than the local LAN. But I’ve seen some low-end NAS units which are incredibly slow. For example, my WD My Passport Pro is a NAS. It could never keep up with a Tablo.
Fundamentally isn’t that what each is? Accessing storage over a network.
I get where you’re going, but a NAS can be configured with various protocols like ftp, for example. Isn’t could storage more static instead of being shared? More as it’s served or sent to the client.
That’s probably it! Network topology can vary so much. But for the minority that would want this, that have configured their own NAS, would have a clue how to configure it – if made available. Theoretically the device could operate on the local network, it has an http server and storage for data. I gather a big issue is network discovery (among other things.)
The largest demographic most likely has a “specialized” antenna somewhere inside their house with high speed broadband internet that just wants to hook something up and use it.
As it stands, it’s limited to USB 2, and 100mbs lan port. (how much more would it have cost to up it to USB 3 and a gagabit lan port - apparently these wouldn’t benefit anyhow.)
… a fraction of what you see posting in the community forums / total users
Where do they have the resources for owners to develop and maintain basic functions? I’d like to have access to my device. I have found some information, but if they are relying on us, we need some resources. They use open source, it’s not all proprietary.
Actually, I think most of the people who would want that option would be ones active on the forums because it’s generally people with issues and/or concerns/wants that are posting, not the people that are totally fine with the product as is.
Quite honestly, with the number of devices on my network I actually prefer the Tablo recording the content locally to an attached drive to minimize potential issues (like high general network usage during the evenings which is when most of the content we record is on) and then pulling and processing the content overnight when there is significantly less network usage.